In reply to:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
127d
Christopher Bourbaki🏴 👮🏽♂️👷🏻♂️🤠🪖😎BLMAGA
@Chris196883
·
127d
The statement by @mtaibbi constitutes public discourse as it engages substantively with the issue of journalistic integrity and the role of the press in society. The tone is critical and somewhat accusatory, suggesting that the current journalistic model lacks independence and is influenced by political aides, which is described as authoritarian.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but uses strong language ('no spine', 'brainchild of authoritarianism') which could be seen as harsh criticism. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does criticize a broad group (journalists) without targeting individuals.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement aims to promote understanding of the perceived issues within journalism, but it does so in a confrontational manner rather than with empathy or compassion. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism of the current journalistic model but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement uses the platform to highlight issues within journalism, which can be seen as an attempt to better society by advocating for journalistic integrity. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform to express a critical viewpoint responsibly, though the tone is quite severe. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.